[OZAPRS] European v USnewparadigmand pathlimiting +confusion....

Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.edu
Sat Nov 11 01:41:43 EST 2006 

> For areas that want to clamp it to a maximum of two digi 
> hops, why not do the following:
> 1.  Let mobiles use the guideline of "APRS v WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2";
> 2.  Add "WIDE2-2" to the UIDIGI list, so that is trapped the
same 
>     as WIDE7-7, and callsign substituted and no further hops

Except that would also trap local uses of W2-2 to one hop also.
But you are on the right track.  Lets see..... If we have two
metro areas that 3 hops would cause mobiles in one to be seen in
the other, then there is a digipeater somewhere in the middle
that has to be involved in the link.  That digi will be involved
in the middle hop.  So if mobiles are all using WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2,
then what this middle digi will see is WIDE1-1*,WIDE2-1.

Maybe if these middle digis (between two metro areas that don't
want to see each other) would then TRAP "WIDE2-1", then I think
you would have a nice system:

1) Mobiles could ALL use WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2 (for 3 hops during
distant travels)
2) These two metro areas would not be bothered by routine
mobiles from the other area
3) But would see out 3 hops in all other directions so they
could see their own distnat travelers in the boonies..

This also has no problem for the often recommended
WIDE1-1,WIDE2-1 path for 2-HOP areas either.  Because a mobile
that uses W1-1,W2-1  will STILL GET 2 HOPS!  Because trapping
the second hop at WIDE2-1 is alerady the second hop anyway.
Thus it has no impact on those users either.

I kind of like this.  It lets mobiles routinely use 3 hops
everywhere, yet it traps their third hop in any areas where
local sysops do not want to see them.

Bottom line:
1) Recommend WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2 for mobiles everywhere
2) Set UIDIGI to TRAP WIDE2-1 in FIREWALL DIGIS that surround
areas that do not want to see distnat 3 hop mobiles.  Notice,
this is a surrounding ring of digis, because you cannot trap the
3rd hop -in- the area where you want to minimize QRM, you have
to trap WIDE2-1 in the digi BEFORE the digis that you don't want
to repeat the 3rd hop.

De WB4APR,
Bob

> 
> 
> In other words, it appears easy for paths to be truncated in 
> the network, to
> suit local needs...  but of course it's pretty hard to expand 
> a user's path
> to be longer, for the more remote areas (where long paths are
needed).
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> 
> Chris
> vk6kch
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ozaprs-bounces at aprs.net.au 
> [mailto:ozaprs-bounces at aprs.net.au] On
> Behalf Of Andrew McDade
> Sent: Friday, 10 November 2006 5:38 AM
> To: Tony Hunt; VK / ZL APRS Users
> Subject: Re: [OZAPRS] European v USnewparadigmand pathlimiting
> +confusion....
> 
> I guess the question we need to ask, is whether 2 hops will 
> allow ALL aprs 
> stations within Australia to reach an Igate reliably.
> 
>  If we have a situation where all stations can hit an Igate 
> in 2 hops or 
> less then well and good, WIDE2-2 is definitely the way to go. 
> But if there 
> are still some areas that require 3 hops to achieve this, 
> then where are we 
> with regards to a standard, default, documentable, promotable 
> Nation Wide 
> config for general APRS users.
> 
> I would hate to see a situation where we've got different 
> default configs 
> for different areas ie. WIDE2-2 for some areas and WIDE3-3 
> for others. I 
> think this would be a regressive step.
> 
> So the question again , are there any areas within Australia 
> that require 3 
> ( or more ) hops to reliably access an Igate ?
> 
> Regards .. Andrew .. VK5EX
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Tony Hunt" <wavetel at bigpond.com>
> To: <ozaprs at aprs.net.au>
> Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 8:12 PM
> Subject: Re: [OZAPRS] European v USnewparadigmand pathlimiting

> +confusion....
> 
> 
> > Whats this idea I see of WIDE3-3 for home stations?? 
> Currently we recomend
> > and use predominantly WIDE2-2 in Adelaide .. If we use 
> WIDE3-3 then we 
> > will
> > cross the border to Mildura and Ouyen .. Is there any need 
> for this many
> > hops if all satations are within 2 hops of an Igate ?? 
> WIDE3-3 will just
> > increase the amount of traffic in our situation and likely 
> insure alot of
> > VK3 traffic right through to Pt Linclon instead of just the 
> occasional bit
> > here and there..
> >
> > Or are we going to recomend WIDE3-3 and then Trap the last 
> hop in the 
> > digis
> > which is one approach..
> >
> > Ive seen this WIDE3-3 mentioned a couple of times now and 
> thought it must
> > have been a typo at first ..
> >
> > Also 50 stations within 50miles of Adelaide.. I concur with 
> Terry.. We 
> > must
> > be on a different map or planet to Bob .. Our Igate shows 
> about 15 locals
> > presently which is about normal
> > http://121.44.67.103:14501/
> > There are 23 VK5s currently listed on my Client here some 
> of which are via
> > the Igate and not on RF..
> >
> > There are about 40 listed here but about 1/2 of them are 
> over a day old 
> > with
> > no recent posits.
> > http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi?vk5*
> >
> > 50 Stations!! I gota to see that .. Talk about rush hour in 
> Adelaide.. We
> > are just an oversized country town here and pleased to be
that way..
> >
> > Melbourne is the traffic worry on 2m APRS from what Ive 
> experienced..
> >
> > Tony  Hunt  VK5AH
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> >> Your thoughts Richard 3JFK too please.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Ron
> >>
> >> On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 11:06 +0800, Chris Hill wrote:
> >> > Hi All,
> >> >
> >> > May I suggest the following "KISS" outcome for APRS in
VK:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 1.  Mobiles set path to "APRS v WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2"
> >> >
> >> > 2.  Home users set path to "APRS v WIDE3-3"
> >> >
> >
> > Bob Said
> >
> >> Boy was I wrong.  I just zoomed on the first call I saw and
> >> found that even Adelade is probably just about optimally
loaded
> >> and cannot afford much coming in from say Melbourne without
> >> having some impact on throughput.  I see 50 stations within
50
> >> miles of Adelade and that is about as high as you want to
go
> >> without losing reliability for small trackers.
> >>
> >> Then I zoomed in on Melbourne and see that it is as dense
as
> >> some of our highest density cities in the USA!  We use
WIDE2-2
> >> in those areas...
> >> (see MAP on
http://www.ew.usna.edu/~bruninga/aprs/fix14439.html
> >>
> >> Seeing these maps, I now am convinced that you are on the
right
> >> track to implement the New-N paradigm measures to help
improve
> >> the reliability of local area APRS.  And since these
population
> >> densities seem quite well focused with big gaps inbetween,
then
> >> it does make sense to limit the WIDEn-N hops so that
mobiles in
> >> one area are not QRMING long distances away to the other
> >> areas...
> >>
> >> Great work!
> >> Bob, Wb4APR
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ozaprs mailing list
> > Ozaprs at aprs.net.au
> > http://aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.32/523 - Release 
> Date: 11/7/2006
> >
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> Ozaprs mailing list
> Ozaprs at aprs.net.au
> http://aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ozaprs mailing list
> Ozaprs at aprs.net.au
> http://aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
> 

_______________________________________________
Ozaprs mailing list
Ozaprs at aprs.net.au
http://aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://second.aprs.net.au/pipermail/ozaprs/attachments/20061111/fb446225/attachment.htm

More information about the Ozaprs mailing list